Month: April 2012

Mitt Romney And Harvard: A Phony Issue!

Ronald Leave a comment

Barack Obama went to Harvard.

George W. Bush went to Harvard.

John F. Kennedy went to Harvard.

Franklin D. Roosevelt went to Harvard.

Theodore Roosevelt went to Harvard.

Rutherford B. Hayes went to Harvard.

John Quincy Adams went to Harvard.

John Adams went to Harvard.

A total of EIGHT Presidents went to Harvard!

Mitt Romney, if he won the White House,. would be the NINTH to have gone to Harvard.

But Romney tried to use this fact, of Obama’s Harvard Law School degree, against him last week, which is awfully lame, when Romney received not only a law degree, but also a business degree from Harvard, and spent four years in Cambridge, as compared to Obama’s three years at the law school.

What is Romney trying to do?

is he trying to say that one should not elect people who went to Harvard, and that no Harvard educated people should be in the cabinets or in advisory positions of any President?

If that is so, then Romney would have very few advisers for his campaign, and would have trouble filling top positions if he became President!

Is this the best that Mitt Romney can do, to be petty, to be ridiculous, to be glorifying mediocrity, rather than advertise the fact that Harvard educated people, and that of other Ivy League universities, are among the best educated people in this nation?

And if a reader wants to imagine that the author has a Harvard degree, forget it, as he is the product of public university education, but has no grudge, jealousy, or anger in understanding and accepting the reality that Harvard and other Ivy League universities have contributed a massive amount to the governing of our nation, as well as in all the professions and the business world!

One should be proud of his or her Ivy League education, and have a sense of purpose and commitment to use that education,. not only to advance oneself, but also to advance the nation that gave him or her that opportunity for a world class education!

Allen West Goes Rogue: Calls 80 Democratic House Members “Communists”! The Rise Of A Black Joseph McCarthy!

Ronald 3 Comments

Florida Congressman Allen West, who defeated Congressman Ron Klein in 2010, and went on a rampage against Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, head of the Democratic National Committee, insulting her in the most despicable terms, is running for a new term in a newly created Congressional district in Northern Palm Beach County, as well as Martin and St Lucie Counties further north.

Holding a town meeting, the former Army Lieutenant Colonel, forced out of the military for his inappropriate behavior against an Iraqi detainee in 2003, went off the deep end literally, accusing 80 members of the Democratic Party in the House of Representatives of being “Communists”, bringing back the ugly reminder of Wisconsin Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy, who ran rampant from February 1950 to December 1954, accusing everyone under the sun of being a Communist or sympathetic toward Communism, promoting the Red Scare, and in so doing, undermining the Truman and Eisenhower Administrations for nearly five years, until he was finally censured for his misbehavior after nearly five years of demagoguery!

Allen West is a literal wingnut, a whacko, a mentally ill person who has had undiagnosed Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and is behaving in a dangerous, aggressive manner, which requires complete denunciation by the House leadership of Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor, as well as GOP Presidential nominee Mitt Romney!

But will this happen? Of course NOT, and the conservative radio talk show hosts and Fox News Channel will take advantage of his irresponsibility to spread the conspiracy theory and try to connect it to Barack Obama as well!

The lunatic fringe of the party is backing Allen West as a possible Vice Presidential nominee, with Sarah Palin and Herman Cain endorsing West for VP. Is there a need to say anything after that statement, that these two leading examples of totally unqualified political leaders would endorse someone just as dangerous and reckless as they are?

Were Romney to pick West, which he will not do, then we would have to order men in white coats to take him forcibly to a mental hospital for observation and testing!

Romney is not that impractical and crazy, but a repudiation by Romney and a censure of West in the House of Representatives, and a chorus of criticism from party members in the US Senate should be seen as a question of character and legitimacy, if the Republican party is to retain ANY respect with the American people!

Allen West needs to be silenced by the voters of his new congressional district, who have the great alternative of Patrick Erin Murphy to represent them in the 113th Congress!

Everyone, no matter where one lives, needs to contribute to Murphy to save that district and the nation any more public attention paid to this lunatic, dangerous, unstable, reckless excuse for a Congressman! The defeat of Allen West needs to be on the front burner for the next seven months!

Mitt Romney: Total Opportunist, Totally Unprincipled!

Ronald Leave a comment

So now Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts Governor, has what he has wanted all of his life: to be the nominee of the Republican Party for the Presidency of the United States!

Now the problem is to WIN the Presidency from a man who is one of the great orators and political “animals” of the modern Presidency, right up there with Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton.

Each of the above had his shortcomings and weaknesses, but each knew how to inspire and motivate people, and have people believe in them and their principles.

Mitt Romney has no such problem, no such oratorical gift, no such ability to inspire and motivate people, and no principles he will not abandon in his mad dash to be President!

Mitt Romney offers himself as a chameleon who will change his views on a moment’s notice if he believes it will help promote his desire to be President!

But by being so inconsistent, so changeable, so lacking in embarrassment that he has totally changed his views and repudiated his record as Governor of Massachusetts, he makes it difficult for anyone to feel a commitment to go out there and vote for Mitt as a principled political leader who one can know how he would conduct himself as President.

Mitt Romney is phony even when he laughs, even when he tells a joke, even when he attempts to sing. One finds himself embarrassed for him, that he cannot look at tapes of himself and wince at how he appears to the American people.

This is a man of unknown quality, an intelligent man for sure, a good family man for sure, probably a lot of fun to be around in private according to his wife’s testimony, a man of strong religious principle for sure, and a man who if he was not running for President might come across as genuine if he was not seeking your vote.

But he is asking us to vote for him without having any clue as to whether he will go back to being a moderate, or remain on the right wing of the Republican Party. We do not know if he would be willing to gut the social safety network that even George W. Bush expanded. We do not know if he would be able to get along with right wing Republicans in Congress, or would be his own man and break with the extremism that they represent.

We do not know how he would shape the Supreme Court, whether he would pick moderates or make the Court so right wing that it would set us back for two generations of time.

We do not know how he would communicate with the media, and through them, with the American people on a daily basis. He certainly would have a tough act to follow, lacking the charisma and personality of Barack Obama.

Would Mitt Romney be willing to preside over the dissolution of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security as we know it? Would he be unwilling to work with our European allies, and be ready to commit troops to ever continuous war in the Middle East? Would he be someone who would resist religious influence to promote an intrusion in government beyond the wishes of the Founding Fathers? Would the Mormon Church gain a special foothold in government, and be able to promote its backward, resistance to change, mentality with a Mormon in the White House, or would Romney, like John F. Kennedy, make clear that he happens to be a Mormon, but is not the Mormon President, not dedicated to the church’s advancement in a nation that is a country of all religions and also, no religious beliefs?

What it comes down to is that Mitt Romney as President would be a total “blank slate”, an unknown, who we would have no idea of what kind of President he would turn out to be.

The question is whether the American people want to gamble on a man who is so much an unknown quantity, due primarily to his chameleon nature!

The betting is clearly that the answer will be NO!

While Gone In DC, The Republican Presidential Race Ended!

Ronald 4 Comments

While the author was gone on vacation in Washington, DC, the Republican race finally came to an end.

Now, some of you might say that Ron Paul is still in the race, but let’s be serious: Mitt Romney is the GOP Presidential nominee, with both Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum having stopped campaigning.

This does not mean that Mitt Romney has an easy road to the nomination, as he still needs several hundred delegates, and has not received the endorsement of either Gingrich or Santorum.

Newt Gingrich left the race primarily for economic issues, and Rick Santorum left due to the illness of his youngest daughter, Bella, and his realization that he might very well lose the Pennsylvania Primary two weeks from now.

By both leaving the race, they remain eligible for consideration in 2016, if Romney does not win the White House, even though one would have to say that for either to believe in their hearts that they have a real chance to be President in the future is purely delusional!

But Mitt Romney now has to face the reality, that in seeking the GOP nomination and selling his soul to the right wing of his party, he has lost credibility completely among middle of the road Americans, and yet is not trusted by the right wing or the evangelical Christians who look on his Mormon faith as a cult.

So Romney cannot be sure that evangelicals and conservatives will actually vote for him in November, and therefore, could lose some of the South and Midwest.

But he also trails terribly behind Barack Obama with women, Hispanics and Latinos, and Independents, and it will be hard to recoup.

And in polls, Romney is not well liked or trusted, and comes across as distant, aloof, and not able to relate to us.

And with Tax Day coming at the end of this week, the Democrats will do their best to remind us that Romney has not released his tax returns, except for the year 2010, while providing John McCain with 23 years of returns when he was considered a possible running mate by McCain in 2008. Why not release all of these tax returns?

The answer is that it is clear that Romney has something to hide, including the reports that he has loads of his $250 million fortune in the Cayman Islands and in Swiss banks!

That makes Romney look very unpatriotic, and unwilling to do his fair share to help the nation, seeing paying higher taxes due to his good fortune, as something that a rich person should feel for the blessing that he was able to accomplish his wealth, and owes it to the country to help its future, rather than just go by the legal limitation of the minimum he needs to pay, due to accounting tricks!

Romney is now said to be “mischievous and naughty” by his wife Anne, often acting like one of their sons, but that does not ring true, and even if so, it does not make up for his unwillingness to understand the plight of the average American, and his stiffness and aloofness and reserve around people he cannot easily relate to.

Americans like to feel that they like their President, and Romney is, unfortunately, simply not a warm and pleasant personality.

That, above all, is his ultimate doom, as it was for Thomas E. Dewey in 1948, who Romney looks more like by the day–an intelligent, qualified person who simply could not relate to the American people he wished to govern.

And get this: both Dewey and Romney grew up in Michigan! Dewey’s campaign against Harry Truman in 1948 went from a landslide lead to a total collapse, against a President who gave the Republican Party “hell”. In the case of Romney, he is way behind with little prospect of recovery, but also running against an incumbent President who is copying the Truman method of giving the Republicans “hell”!

“The Progressive Professor” Away In Washington, DC Until April 10

Ronald 3 Comments

The author is taking a five day vacation, visiting his son in Washington, DC, between today and next Tuesday, April 10.

However, the news will continue to be followed, and further commentary will be given upon
my return on April 10. Happy Easter and Happy Passover to everyone who reads this blog!

The Month Of April In Presidential And American History

Ronald Leave a comment

The month of April is particularly rich in Presidential History.

The following Presidents were born in the month of April:

Thomas Jefferson April 13
James Monroe April 28
James Buchanan April 23
Ulysses Grant April 27

The following Presidents died in the month of April:

William Henry Harrison April 4
Abraham Lincoln April 15
Franklin D. Roosevelt April 12
Richard Nixon April 22

Additionally,

John Tyler became President in April.
The Civil War began in April. (Lincoln)
The Civil War ended in April.(Lincoln)
Andrew Johnson became President in April.
The Spanish American War began in April.(McKinley)
American entrance into World War I was in April. (Wilson)
Harry Truman became President in April.
The Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba occurred in April.(Kennedy)
The unsuccessful attempt to rescue American hostages in Iran occurred in April. (Carter)

American World Commitment Now 95 Years And Counting: A Time For Reassessment!

Ronald Leave a comment

This first week of April marks an important milestone, as 95 years ago, during the Presidency of Woodrow Wilson, who had entered office committed to domestic progressive reforms, he ended up becoming a war time President.

Wilson accomplished his domestic reforms, becoming the most active domestic President in American history, but later to be surpassed by Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson.

But also, after much delay and attempt to avoid entrance into war, he felt forced to go to Congress and ask for a declaration of war against Germany, Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Turks, and in support of Great Britain, France, Italy, and Russia, in what was then called first the Great War, then the World War, and then ultimately the First World War.

America had conducted trade with all nations, had gone to war against Spain in the Spanish-American War of 1898, had intervened in Latin America under Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and Woodrow Wilson, and had engaged in diplomacy with Europe and Asia, particularly under TR.

But the thought of committing troops to a continental war was beyond conception of Americans before the first week of April 1917. On April 2, Wilson delivered a war message, and four days of fierce debate began, with the final vote to go to war on April 6, by a margin of 373-50 in the House of Representatives, and 89-6 in the US Senate.

Since 1917, the United States has been engaged in SEVEN wars–World War I (1917-1918), World War II (1941-1945), Korean War (1950-1953), Vietnam War (1964-1973), Persian Gulf War (1991), Afghanistan War (2001-Present), Iraq War (2003-2011).

Additionally, this nation has been involved in military actions too numerous to list, or even to have an accurate count, including many secret interventions with special forces and intelligence agents in the CIA and other intelligence agencies, many of them secret in nature.

America has involvement in close to 160 countries in some form or manner, and we have become an imperial nation, the leader of the “free world”, first against Fascism and Nazism, then against Communism, and now against terrorism, which is an open ended commitment with no seeming end date.

This nation had a military draft in 1917-1918, in 1940-1947, and 1948-1973, but since, it has been the National Guard and the regular military forces that have borne the brunt of war. It has been easier for many in America to ignore our war involvement, since there is no longer mass participation in war. And that has affected the poor treatment of veterans who commit themselves to war, and now are surviving injuries in greater numbers, but often have mental issues not so easily addressed.

We now have very few members of Congress who have served in the military or in a war zone, and very few children of members of Congress who do the same. And now we will have a Presidential election with neither major candidate having served in the military, the
first such case since World War II.

This commemoration of our entrance into the First World War 95 years ago this week is a good time to stop and reflect and reassess what we are doing, and whether we can afford and also wish to keep spending so much blood and treasure on warfare, which is in many ways undermining our economic present and future.

We have become a security state, that is unwilling to face the reality that we cannot control the world, and think it will not harm our domestic tranquility and agenda. We are becoming a nation that can be compared to other empires that ultimately fell, including the Roman Empire, the Spanish Empire, and the British Empire.

The next President, whether Barack Obama or Mitt Romney, must get beyond the rhetoric, and seriously review the reality of what we are doing, and come to the conclusion that our national security is not helped by a constant state of war, and military spending getting out of control, and undermining our education, health care, and so many other programs and needs that will have to be pushed aside, if we do not stop the mad dash toward total, endless state of war!

Martin Luther King Assassination Anniversary, And Trayvon Martin As A Symbol

Ronald Leave a comment

Today marks 44 years since the tragic assassination of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in Memphis, Tennessee.

As we mourn that event yet again, and as more Americans visit the MLK Memorial in Washington, DC, we have to ask how far have we come from that day in 1968.

Certainly, the conditions for African Americans are far better today than they were in 1968, but that does not mean we can sit on our laurels.

Having a President who is African American; having other political leaders in Congress and the states and cities who are African American; seeing the growth of a large black middle class; witnessing more African Americans in the professions; witnessing more interracial marriages–all these signs of progress are wonderful!

But they are not enough, when we still have a large crime rate in the inner city ghettos; when black males are an endangered species when they end up in white neighborhoods and are seen as intruders; when one third of young black males are in prison; when the educational attainment of many African Americans still trails that of other racial groups; and when the illegitimacy rate is still much too high in African American households.

And the case of Trayvon Martin, a young black male who was no threat to anyone except for his skin color, being murdered by a man who had no right to utilize his gun; was over 100 pounds heavier; and who was told by 911 operators to leave tracking of Martin to the police, so as to ascertain if he was looking for trouble, is just the tip of the iceberg!

As long as we have tragedies such as Trayvon Martin, we are far from judging people by the content of their character, rather than the color of their skin. Prejudice and discrimination still run rampant, sadly, two generations after King’s death!

Is It The Kennedy Court, Rather Than The Roberts Court?

Ronald 1 Comment

The more one analyzes the US Supreme Court in recent years, it is more clear than ever that we should call it the Anthony Kennedy Court, rather than the John Roberts Court!

Kennedy, appointed to the Supreme Court by Ronald Reagan in 1988 as a compromise choice who could pass Senate muster, after the well publicized rejection of Robert Bork in 1987, has now been on the Court for 24 years, and is seen more than ever as the “swing vote” on the Court, first sharing that with former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, until her retirement in 2005, but now all by himself as the most significant vote on the Court.

Kennedy, basically a conservative but with an open mind, has leaned to the Right two thirds of the time, and to the Left one third of the time on the average.

It is seen by just about all Court watchers that Kennedy’s vote on the Obama Health Care legislation is crucial, as to whether it survives or goes down.

Kennedy disappointed many on the left in being in the majority on the Bush V. Gore case of 2000, the Citizens United case of 2010, and the Strip Search case of this past Monday. But at the same time, he upheld the rights of gays to privacy in the Lawrence V. Texas case of 2003, enraging fellow Justice Antonin Scalia.

His questioning about the Obama Health Care law last week showed the quandary he is in, and he is getting pressure from many sources to uphold the law, but the belief is that he will not give in to pressure, and might even be tempted to go with the other conservative Justices in overturning the law.

The theory is that IF Kennedy goes with upholding the law, that Chief Justice John Roberts will join him, making it a 6-3 vote, but that if he decides to negate the law, then the vote will be a partisan 5-4 vote against the legislation.

So to call the present Court the Kennedy Court seems very appropriate!

The Need For Supreme Court Reform By Constitutional Amendment

Ronald 1 Comment

THe controversy over the US Supreme Court has grown in recent years, with the Bush V. Gore case of 2000, where the Court, by partisan majority, chose a President; and the Citizens United case of 2010, which also, by partisan majority, the Court claimed that corporations and labor unions had the same right to freedom of speech in politics as did ordinary citizens, and has led to the Super PACs that are now distorting campaign finance in the Presidential Election of 2012.

That, along with the concern that the Court might strike down the Obama Health Care legislation by another 5-4 partisan majority, and the Strip Search decision of the Court this past Monday, also by partisan majority, makes many wonder if there is not a need for Supreme Court reform.

This is nothing new, as a century ago, during their Progressive Party campaigns for President of former President Theodore Roosevelt in 1912 and Wisconsin Senator Robert La Follette, Sr. in 1924, as well as proposals of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1937, suggestions for changes, including constitutional amendment changes by TR and La Follette. were advocated.

Of course, the constitutional amendment route is a very difficult one, and it could be a long road to necessary change, but even if not imminent, the changes that this blogger proposes are worthy of consideration, if not adoption.

These proposed changes would include the following:

A term on the Supreme Court should not be lifetime, but instead 15 years maximum, which in most cases, would mean the Justice would be over 70 at the end of the term.

No one should serve on the Supreme Court past the age of 80, with only a handful who have so served, including outstanding men, such as Oliver Wendell Holmes and John Paul Stevens. Losing such luminaries at age 80 is a shame, but no one can be considered as irreplaceable, as the President and the Pope are replaceable, as well as any other position in any government!

While 5-4 decisions on normal cases would continue, any attempt to override legislation passed by Congress should require a super majority of 6-3 to have such effect. Since we have a two thirds vote for a constitutional amendment to pass Congress and go to the states for ratification; a two thirds vote to override a Presidential veto; and a two thirds vote to ratify a treaty in the US Senate, it seems reasonable that a two thirds vote should be necessary to overturn a congressional law.

What these suggested amendments do is allow turnover on the Court more regularly, and stop the image of the Supreme Court as being out of touch with America, and as an arrogant, unelected group that can hold back progress!